Spinal manifestations of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Since its initial description, the definition of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS) has notably changed. At present, it broadly refers to disorders of the connective tissue that are heritable and have similar features including joint hypermobility, dermal dysplasia, and vascular as well as internal organ fragility. There has been no comprehensive review of spinal manifestations of EDS in the recent literature. That has led to controversies in management protocols of this so-called orphan disease. METHODS: The authors used the latest version of the EDS classification from 2017, in which 13 subtypes were recognized. EDS has 19 different causal genes, mainly associated with collagen synthesis. Of these, 5 subtypes have associated spinal manifestations. RESULTS: Some of the spinal pathologies associated with EDS include Chiari malformation, craniocervical instability, kyphoscoliosis, segmental instability and kyphosis, spontaneous CSF leaks, Tarlov cyst syndrome, tethered cord, and problems associated with wound healing. Here, the authors briefly discuss the demographics, etiology, pathophysiology, clinical features, management strategies, and directions for further research for each of these manifestations. CONCLUSIONS: EDS belongs to the group of orphan diseases, with the total patient population being below 200,000. Further research on spinal manifestations of EDS is the need of the hour to establish clinical practice guidelines and close the significant knowledge gaps that currently exist.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".